Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

our economy is on the mend. No matter what happens this election our economy is going to recover this next 4 years anyway. So if romney is elected and people see the inevitable economic growth for his term, will it be a tragedy that people will think obama caused our downfall and romney was the savior, but infact it was obamas recovery planned that was truly the savior?

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanjizzle

our economy is on the mend. No matter what happens this election our economy is going to recover this next 4 years anyway. So if romney is elected and people see the inevitable economic growth for his term, will it be a tragedy that people will think obama caused our downfall and romney was the savior, but infact it was obamas recovery planned that was truly the savior?

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

100% chance our economy crashes again before any recovery. And the recovery is only possible if government gets emo and starts cutting itself from top to bottom.

The real tragedy is if Romney gets elected, then the inevitable crash happens, and people blame free market capitalism (which Romney supposedly represents), instead of the true culprit.. government and our mixed economy.

Btw.. in 2 months it will come out that unemployment is only 7.1 percent, and the stock market is up, and people will say that's a "recovery." I disagree. The government and federal reserve are using every trick they know to keep the economy "stable," tricks that will make the eventual crash much worse than it could have been. When I say recovery, I mean a real recovery based on market forces. Not everyone agrees with those terms, fine, but I think you're wrong.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinNYC

Joe, can you actually define a recovery?

Because we are in a recovery. A very, very slow one, but we are no longer in recession.

Do you feel that only when we get back to 2007 levels we can call it a recovery, not the whole upward climb?

Also the IMF just released a report that says countries that did the emo thing and did a cutting worsened their economic situations.

We're having a phony, debt/government/federal reserve based recovery, that is not sustainable. That's why I don't think of it as a real recovery. All of the measures they've taken to boost the economy in the short term, will serve to actually make the real recovery even harder to achieve.

If you read the Austrian theory of the business cycle, you know that the federal reserve (or any central bank) creates mal-investment when they push down interest rates. In the short term, investment and spending go up, and we experience a "boom" (the 90's and 20's are examples of this). But in the long term, the investments made during the boom are revealed as unsustainable/undesired by the market, and we face a bust (30's, 2000's). This is the biggest reason Austrians, like Ron Paul for example, are against the Fed.

Now just assume this theory is true for a second, and put aside your likely disagreement, so you can see where the Austrian school is coming from.

Many economists right now believe the economy is in recovery, but the Austrians say it's not. The reason being, is our economy is only being kept afloat right now thanks to the FED. The Fed is basically not allowing our economy to "digest" the malinvestments that were caused during the 90's boom period, and take the MEDICINE of a recession.

Where most people see the "bust" or recession as being a 100% negative experience, the Austrians see the bust period as the cure to this fed-created boom. A recession is when malinvestments are purged, and the market economy (all on its own, without government interference), can regroup and recreate itself along more stable lines.

What's going on right now, is that the Fed (and federal government) are not allowing the economy to restructure itself. They are trying to keep the "boom" alive, but all that's doing is creating more long-term malinvestment. When interest rates finally raise, and the Fed isn't able to "help" any more, the true recession will hit us like a fat sack of bricks.

I can't speak on the examples that the IMF gave, but two thoughts pop into my mind immediately. 1) Did those countries REALLY try to cut spending, or is that just perception? Nowadays, people cry "austerity" when government cuts 5 dollar off the budget. And 2) In any event, real austerity will bring about some pain, so it wouldn't surprise me even if you were right. Like I said, the only way to recovery is to face the harsh recession. The recession should not be feared, it should be embraced. If we allow the market economy to work, it will create an amazing economy for us in a relatively short time span. But unfortunately, there's no way to get there without facing a nasty recession first. And that eventual recession will be nastier and nastier, the longer the Fed delays it.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanjizzle

our economy is on the mend. No matter what happens this election our economy is going to recover this next 4 years anyway. So if romney is elected and people see the inevitable economic growth for his term, will it be a tragedy that people will think obama caused our downfall and romney was the savior, but infact it was obamas recovery planned that was truly the savior?

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe

We're having a phony, debt/government/federal reserve based recovery, that is not sustainable. That's why I don't think of it as a real recovery. All of the measures they've taken to boost the economy in the short term, will serve to actually make the real recovery even harder to achieve.

If you read the Austrian theory of the business cycle, you know that the federal reserve (or any central bank) creates mal-investment when they push down interest rates. In the short term, investment and spending go up, and we experience a "boom" (the 90's and 20's are examples of this). But in the long term, the investments made during the boom are revealed as unsustainable/undesired by the market, and we face a bust (30's, 2000's). This is the biggest reason Austrians, like Ron Paul for example, are against the Fed.

Now just assume this theory is true for a second, and put aside your likely disagreement, so you can see where the Austrian school is coming from.

Many economists right now believe the economy is in recovery, but the Austrians say it's not. The reason being, is our economy is only being kept afloat right now thanks to the FED. The Fed is basically not allowing our economy to "digest" the malinvestments that were caused during the 90's boom period, and take the MEDICINE of a recession.

Where most people see the "bust" or recession as being a 100% negative experience, the Austrians see the bust period as the cure to this fed-created boom. A recession is when malinvestments are purged, and the market economy (all on its own, without government interference), can regroup and recreate itself along more stable lines.

What's going on right now, is that the Fed (and federal government) are not allowing the economy to restructure itself. They are trying to keep the "boom" alive, but all that's doing is creating more long-term malinvestment. When interest rates finally raise, and the Fed isn't able to "help" any more, the true recession will hit us like a fat sack of bricks.

I can't speak on the examples that the IMF gave, but two thoughts pop into my mind immediately. 1) Did those countries REALLY try to cut spending, or is that just perception? Nowadays, people cry "austerity" when government cuts 5 dollar off the budget. And 2) In any event, real austerity will bring about some pain, so it wouldn't surprise me even if you were right. Like I said, the only way to recovery is to face the harsh recession. The recession should not be feared, it should be embraced. If we allow the market economy to work, it will create an amazing economy for us in a relatively short time span. But unfortunately, there's no way to get there without facing a nasty recession first. And that eventual recession will be nastier and nastier, the longer the Fed delays it.

So here's my question. Do you agree with the Austrians because you think they are accurate or do you agree with them because their ideas fit your worldview.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinNYC

So here's my question. Do you agree with the Austrians because you think they are accurate or do you agree with them because their ideas fit your worldview.

They are accurate. Shoveling free money to the banks to help releverage instead of allowing them to feel the pain of deleveraging is a solution to you? The fed has entered the political arena and it's pretty unprecedented. Bernanke is Obama's lapdog and has ordered another round of quantitative easing during election season. Of course, you can eat up all the recovery bullshit while the bankers tink glasses and reap obscene profits, and in 10 or so years, shit will definitely hit the fan and the cycle repeats itself.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

I've never seen a board so left wing and liberal with its views. Especially with how hard you guys push it and berate those with opposing views.
Its the same crowd that complains about choice and freedom as well. Joe and rufus seem to be the only ones with clear heads when it comes to thinking these things out.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jello

They are accurate. Shoveling free money to the banks to help releverage instead of allowing them to feel the pain of deleveraging is a solution to you? The fed has entered the political arena and it's pretty unprecedented. Bernanke is Obama's lapdog and has ordered another round of quantitative easing during election season. Of course, you can eat up all the recovery bullshit while the bankers tink glasses and reap obscene profits, and in 10 or so years, shit will definitely hit the fan and the cycle repeats itself.

Well I just remember all the predictions in 2009 that the dollar would collapse and economy would be like Zimbabwe's.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe

I can't speak on the examples that the IMF gave, but two thoughts pop into my mind immediately. 1) Did those countries REALLY try to cut spending, or is that just perception? Nowadays, people cry "austerity" when government cuts 5 dollar off the budget. And 2) In any event, real austerity will bring about some pain, so it wouldn't surprise me even if you were right. Like I said, the only way to recovery is to face the harsh recession. The recession should not be feared, it should be embraced. If we allow the market economy to work, it will create an amazing economy for us in a relatively short time span. But unfortunately, there's no way to get there without facing a nasty recession first. And that eventual recession will be nastier and nastier, the longer the Fed delays it.

I don't think you understand exactly what happened in the 30's after the Great Depression when Hoover completely believed the principle that markets are self-regulatory and pretty much did nothing while the country turned into chaos.

What he didn't understand and what you also seem not to understand is that even though markets are indeed self-regulatory, the re-balancing of market forces can take a long period of time (mainly because humans are susceptible to strong emotions in times of economic chaos).

The thing is, banks have become so huge (and got even bigger during the crisis with all the mergers) that they are simply too big to fail. The plan is to try and assuage the effects of the crisis and then deleverage the banks and regulate the market. If you read Bernanke's thesis on the Great Depression you would understand what's his proposed solution to the problem.

Re: Will it be a tragedy if Romney is elected and is given credit for a econmic recover

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-hoop

I don't think you understand exactly what happened in the 30's after the Great Depression when Hoover completely believed the principle that markets are self-regulatory and pretty much did nothing while the country turned into chaos.

What he didn't understand and what you also seem not to understand is that even though markets are indeed self-regulatory, the re-balancing of market forces can take a long period of time (mainly because humans are susceptible to strong emotions in times of economic chaos).

The thing is, banks have become so huge (and got even bigger during the crisis with all the mergers) that they are simply too big to fail. The plan is to try and assuage the effects of the crisis and then deleverage the banks and regulate the market. If you read Bernanke's thesis on the Great Depression you would understand what's his proposed solution to the problem.